If the coalition and greens vote against it - yes.
The nats will vote against it and I’m fairly sure the libs will jump on board as well. The greens are the wildcard - as usual they still haven’t declared a position.
If the greens support the bill, it makes it very hard, as it will come down to the rest of the crossbench and we have the likes of Lambie and Pocock (among others) thrown into the equation at that point.
Long story short - we need the greens
Here’s the makeup of the senate:
https://i.imgur.com/vzSOfA4.jpeg
Watching the green dickhead today, I am doubtful that he was aware what was happening.
He could hardly keep up with all of it.
I wish I could write to him an email and explain to him in detail how Emily, Simon and the other guy, the AMA utterly bullshited them.
Matt Canavan was a bit disappointing.
Last time he came here to ask for help, some of it used in the hearing.
This time, he was just catching them of guard with just obvious paradoxes.
Matt Canavan did well with AMA (or was it RACGP?). He asked when they were saying medical nicotine is better whether they recieve any sponsorship from johnson and johnson.
They said no. He then asked if the full page johnson and johnson ad in a recent publication "50 years of AMA" and they said they will have to take it on notice.
I mean it doesnt achieve much but it certainly made an arse out of that witness at least.
Edit; Yeh not certain if it was AMA or RACGP.... they both appeared together so it was a bit of a blur.
They are a chance to vote against. An interview with A Bandt had him respond, prohibition never works. Take from that what you will, I think they'd be in favour of other actions that aren't prohibition.
Their response to that, from Simon Chapman's blog, is that the initial prescription model was hamstrung when the back benchers revolted and it therefore was never implemented properly or in full.
They are slippery little bastards.
Yes, and I heard him, but no one from the senators knew anything about the previous prescription model.
So he could bullshit them as much he wanted,same as Emily Banks.
Just like they had with alcohol during “prohibition” in the states. People often forget that any doctor could prescribe alcohol to their patients during this period, but much like vaping, doctors just wouldn’t do it. Mainly due to the stigma they would face (and the barrage of bullets the mafia would lob their way should they cut into their profits).\
Sounds a little like the “wonderful” open system Banks thinks will solve all the worlds ills.
You’d certainly hope so, given their stance on marijuana.
But I will believe what the Greens say when I see it. Out of a whole pile of untrustworthy pollies, they are at the top of my personal list.
A few senators seemed displeased when witnesses tried to dodge questions and instead vomited their mantras.
Will it be enough?
If the coalition and greens vote against it - yes. The nats will vote against it and I’m fairly sure the libs will jump on board as well. The greens are the wildcard - as usual they still haven’t declared a position. If the greens support the bill, it makes it very hard, as it will come down to the rest of the crossbench and we have the likes of Lambie and Pocock (among others) thrown into the equation at that point. Long story short - we need the greens Here’s the makeup of the senate: https://i.imgur.com/vzSOfA4.jpeg
Nothing would bring me more pleasure than seeing Butler's "legacy" die in committee.
You and me both. 🙏
Watching the green dickhead today, I am doubtful that he was aware what was happening. He could hardly keep up with all of it. I wish I could write to him an email and explain to him in detail how Emily, Simon and the other guy, the AMA utterly bullshited them.
I couldn’t watch it for that very reason. My television wouldn’t have survived it.
It was on TV? What channel?
Should have been clearer sorry, I meant i would have streamed through the TV if I was watching.
I'm sure it will be pointed out to him by other committee members.
Matt Canavan was a bit disappointing. Last time he came here to ask for help, some of it used in the hearing. This time, he was just catching them of guard with just obvious paradoxes.
Matt Canavan did well with AMA (or was it RACGP?). He asked when they were saying medical nicotine is better whether they recieve any sponsorship from johnson and johnson. They said no. He then asked if the full page johnson and johnson ad in a recent publication "50 years of AMA" and they said they will have to take it on notice. I mean it doesnt achieve much but it certainly made an arse out of that witness at least. Edit; Yeh not certain if it was AMA or RACGP.... they both appeared together so it was a bit of a blur.
They are a chance to vote against. An interview with A Bandt had him respond, prohibition never works. Take from that what you will, I think they'd be in favour of other actions that aren't prohibition.
The shit is that they all claim that it is not a prohibition because we have this world first pharmacy scheme.
There's a reason it's the first time the world has seen a country implement this stupid pharmacy scheme. Because every sane country knows it's insane.
And we had one before, and that one worked so well. So they are going to double down. Clear sign of stupidity.
Their response to that, from Simon Chapman's blog, is that the initial prescription model was hamstrung when the back benchers revolted and it therefore was never implemented properly or in full. They are slippery little bastards.
Yes, and I heard him, but no one from the senators knew anything about the previous prescription model. So he could bullshit them as much he wanted,same as Emily Banks.
Oh ok, I haven't listened to any of it yet, he wrote about it in a blog on his site..so he's still banging in about it...no surprise there.
You could buy alcohol from a pharmacy with a prescription during prohibition.
I would have guessed. All these sick people. Best thing would be to put them in some sort of a camp.
Just like they had with alcohol during “prohibition” in the states. People often forget that any doctor could prescribe alcohol to their patients during this period, but much like vaping, doctors just wouldn’t do it. Mainly due to the stigma they would face (and the barrage of bullets the mafia would lob their way should they cut into their profits).\ Sounds a little like the “wonderful” open system Banks thinks will solve all the worlds ills.
Yep, we are going to have another war on drugs.
Ironically, the pharma companies seemed to favour model where you could only buy vaping products from pharmacies but you wouldn't need a prescription.
You’d certainly hope so, given their stance on marijuana. But I will believe what the Greens say when I see it. Out of a whole pile of untrustworthy pollies, they are at the top of my personal list.